January 31, 2019 31, January Gray Andrew and Pezzner Benjamin ALLOWANCE THE ATTAINING AND ACTION OFFICE THE ANTICIPATING EXAMINER’SFROM AN PERSPECTIVE: PROSECUTION PATENT © 2019 Morgan, Lewis & Bockius LLP Presenter Background • Patent Examiner: 3 years – 3 different art units; my last art unit was run very well, we followed all of the rules, primaries were very good, SPE was fair, I didn't understand the criticism from the blogs – goal was to document the thinking of an examiner so I could use it on the outside • Patent Attorney: 2 years – expected the goal to be outwitting examiners and getting allowances – goal turned out to be attaining higher quality examination (with allowances being a byproduct) 2 Presentation Goal • Make Examination Great Again! – show you how to get patent examiners to follow their own rules, to follow their training, to be more accountable – more accountability = higher quality examination = more allowances 3 Agenda 1. Day in the life of an examiner – motivations, training, oversight 2. Using rules to get leverage – the rules that, if broken, result in a do-over 3. Using leverage to move prosecution forward – without losing examiner goodwill (diplomatic vs. adversarial); interviews 4. When diplomacy fails – steps to take before appeal 5. 101 developments – examiner training, thoughts on implementation 4 PART 1 DAY IN THE LIFE OF AN EXAMINER Day in the Life: Motivation • Evaluated based on quantity (production) and quality (master review form) • Main motivation: work as quickly and efficiently as possible (quantity) + make quality just high enough to not get dinged on review (quality) – part of the academy training to not go overboard – not concerned about winning or losing on appeal – not concerned with trying to find the best way to get your case allowed or abandoned • Only concerned with the next office action, and how to maximize bang (production credit available) for the buck (time spent working for that credit) 6 Day in the Life: Production, Bonuses, and Overtime • Grades come out every biweek, every quarter, every year • Bonuses for annual production and rolling windows of production • Extra production can be billed as overtime • Salary+bonuses+overtime maxes out at congressional pay, currently $164k highest base salary is $118k => 40% raise for making bonuses and overtime 7 Day in the Life: Production Production = • Counts – 2.0 counts per round of prosecution – 1 round of prosecution = first action --> second action --> disposal (RCE, appeal, allow, abandon) 1.25 0.25 0.5 • Examining Time – get non-exam “other time” for: training, interview preparation (30 min), AFCP consideration (2 hr) – no “other time” for: regular after-final practice, non-interview phone calls, misc communications between submitting OA and receiving response To maximize production: (i) maximize counts, and (ii) maximize “other time” – if you're asking the examiner to do something that won't result in counts or the ability to bill other time, there's no motivation for the examiner to do it – you can still motivate the examiner, however, if you have leverage 8 Day in the Life: Production Production = • Counts – 2.0 counts per round of prosecution – 1 round of prosecution = first action --> second action --> disposal (RCE, appeal, allow, abandon) 1.25 0.25 0.5 • Examining Time – get non-exam “other time” for: training, interview preparation (30 min), AFCP consideration (2 hr) – no “other time” for: regular after-final practice, non-interview phone calls, misc communications between submitting OA and receiving response To maximize production: (i) maximize counts, and (ii) maximize “other time” – if you're asking the examiner to do something that won't result in counts or the ability to bill other time, there's no motivation for the examiner to do it – you can still motivate the examiner, however, if you have leverage 9 Day in the Life: Production Production = • Counts – 2.0 counts per round of prosecution – 1 round of prosecution = first action --> second action --> disposal (RCE, appeal, allow, abandon) 1.25 0.25 0.5 • Examining Time – get non-exam “other time” for: training, interview preparation (30 min), AFCP consideration (2 hr) – no “other time” for: regular after-final practice, non-interview phone calls, misc communications between submitting OA and receiving response To maximize production: (i) maximize counts, and (ii) maximize “other time” – if you're asking the examiner to do something that won't result in counts or the ability to bill other time, there's no motivation for the examiner to do it – you can still motivate the examiner, however, if you have leverage 10 Day in the Life: Production Production = • Counts – 2.0 counts per round of prosecution – 1 round of prosecution = first action --> second action --> disposal (RCE, appeal, allow, abandon) 1.25 0.25 0.5 • Examining Time – get non-exam “other time” for: training, interview preparation (30 min), AFCP consideration (2 hr) – no “other time” for: regular after-final practice, non-interview phone calls, misc communications between submitting OA and receiving response To maximize production: (i) maximize counts, and (ii) maximize “other time” – if you're asking the examiner to do something that won't result in counts or the ability to bill other time, there's no motivation for the examiner to do it – you can still motivate the examiner, however, if you have leverage 11 Day in the Life: Prosecution First Action On the Merits – Text Search – supposed to search the inventive concept as described in the spec (compact prosecution) – if the spec is long, the inventive concept is otherwise unclear, or the claims are so basic that a review of the spec is unnecessary, examiners will just look at the claims – even if the spec is brief and explicitly spells out the inventive concept, examiners will reject based on the claims anyway, especially if they can understand the claims – Rejection Strategy – cover all the bases (especially if on the sig program) by making a couple quick objections for informalities, a 101 rejection, a couple 112 rejections if possible, and a 102 or 103 rejection – junior examiners are more likely to ignore allowable subject matter because it can sometimes be a hassle to get permission to designate as such, especially on a first action 12 Day in the Life: Prosecution First Action On the Merits (cont.) • Search strategy for 102/103 rejections 1) look for the perfect reference (102) – break concepts into words and strings of synonyms for those words – look at references that use various combinations of those words in the same sentence, paragraph, group of paragraphs, and so forth 2) settle for a combination (103) – if no perfect reference exists, break up the inventive concept into component concepts, search each component separately – combine the references with any motivation statement (even if it's not a TSM or KSR rationale) 13 Day in the Life: Prosecution First Action On the Merits (cont.) • Notes on Examiner Search – examiners know that the prior art teaching is not the same as the claimed feature, but the reference may still work if the claims are broad – if examiner can't find the concept in the prior art, examiner will just focus on finding words that can be mapped to the words in the claims 14 Day in the Life: Prosecution First Action On the Merits (cont.) • Problem: Buzzword Bingo! – Words pulled from disparate parts of the reference o separate/conflicting embodiments o features that don’t make sense when combined o dicta/commentary – Example o claim for a support surface o examiner searches for “support” and “surface” in the same paragraph o cites to the user’s ear AND a table 15 Day in the Life: Prosecution All subsequent actions • Look at the applicant's arguments if the arguments are good: – if the applicant amended, have more leeway to find new references – if the applicant did not amend, respond to the arguments or allow the case if the arguments are not good: – respond to the arguments, maintain the rejection – more time to respond to arguments and look for new references if RCE (vs. final or after final) 16 Day in the Life: Prosecution Allowable Subject Matter • Easier for junior examiners to get permission to allow after one or two amendments • Must get permission from a primary or SPE; amount of scrutiny related to examiner's dependability • Allowances are a pain to write up 17 Day in the Life: Prosecution Appeal • Treated as a regular response – respond to the arguments, get counts • After submitting the examiner's answer, no more skin in the game – does no good to threaten to appeal during an interview • If examiner is overruled, examiner picks up where the case left off – reject again? get permission to allow? 18 Day in the Life: Examiner’s Toolkit • Broadest Reasonable Interpretation (BRI) – no easy way to win this argument with the examiner; more of an issue for appeal – instead, talk about concepts and talk about using alternative words that describe the concept but don't have the same BRI that is allegedly taught by the reference • Motivation Statements – no easy way to win this argument with the examiner; more of an issue for appeal – can try to note that dependent claim rejections are missing motivations to combine (examiner needs them for every new embodiment in the reference) • Vagueness – lack of clarity in BRI and obviousness statements, bulk citations, single response to multiple arguments – fix by getting the examiner to take a more specific position during the interview 19 PART 2 GETTING LEVERAGE Sources of Leverage • QIR (Quality Index Reporting) SPE is graded by the Art Unit's average QIR => the SPE is marked down for: – (1) % employees averaging >2 actions/disposal – (2) disposal = RCE (vs. appeal/allow/abandon) – (3) restriction made after 1st action – (4) 2nd nonfinals – (5) final reopened (after final, pre-appeal, appeal) • Examiners are highly motivated to avoid (4) and (5), because it affects the SPE • If you find an error that results in (4) or (5), this gives you leverage 21 Golden Rules Breaking these rules = new ground of rejection (do-over) 1.